Differences between the sexes 'could be inherent', expert says as girls set to beat boys at GCSE for the 38th year

Girls in England are now less likely than boys to achieve top grades at GCSE, despite remaining more likely to pursue higher education, according to new data released alongside the release of GCSE results. The findings reveal a narrowing gap in academic performance between the sexes, with girls still leading in most subjects, though boys show stronger results in certain areas such as mathematics and science. The latest figures show that nearly a quarter, 24.5 percent, of girls' GCSE entries received at least a grade 7 or A, compared to just 19.4 percent of boys' entries. This represents a 5.1 percentage point difference, marking the smallest gap since 2000. While the overall proportion of students achieving top grades rose slightly, the increase was more pronounced among boys, indicating a shift in the traditional pattern of gender-based academic outcomes. Professor Alan Smithers, an education expert at the University of Buckingham, has analyzed the data and suggests that the observed differences between the sexes may be rooted in inherent factors rather than external influences. He notes that girls have consistently outperformed boys in GCSE exams since 1989, with the current gap being the narrowest in decades. According to his research, girls led in 40 out of 47 subjects, while boys excelled in math-related disciplines such as mathematics, statistics, physics, economics, and other sciences. Smithers acknowledges that attributing educational disparities to biological or innate characteristics carries risks in today’s climate, where discussions around gender equality often dominate public discourse. However, he argues that the consistent and persistent nature of the achievement gap warrants further scrutiny. He has long advocated for government-led investigations into the reasons behind boys' underperformance, but his calls have largely gone unheeded, possibly due to prevailing narratives that prioritize women’s advancement. The professor also highlights that girls are more likely to attain high scores across multiple subjects, with a greater proportion securing straight 9s in seven or more subjects. Furthermore, he points out that more female students continue to pursue university education than their male counterparts, reinforcing the notion that girls maintain an advantage in post-secondary academic pathways. Smithers attributes some of the differences to variations in assessment methods and the perception of education’s value. He suggests that girls may place greater importance on academic achievement and apply themselves more consistently. However, he warns that neglecting the potential of boys could have broader implications, including reduced national economic competitiveness and diminished global standing. The data also reveals an interesting contrast in A-level results, where boys outperformed girls in top grades. Smithers explains this discrepancy by noting that no subject is compulsory at the A-level stage, allowing boys to focus on areas where they traditionally excel. As GCSE results are now issued using a numerical grading system ranging from 1 to 9, with 4 equating to a C and 7 to an A, the transition from the previous alphabetical grading system has introduced new benchmarks for evaluating student performance. Across the UK, the shift in grading systems varies by region, with Wales and Northern Ireland retaining the older letter-based system. This regional variation adds complexity to comparing educational outcomes nationally. The release of GCSE results coincides with ongoing debates about how best to support all students, particularly boys, in achieving their full academic potential.